New Policies against Hijab

[Lulua]

Assalaamu alaikum ya muslimeen.

Greetings and good day to all.

The pressure being put upon muslims around the globe is gaining strength day by day.

Read the following message to further understand that the problems and atrocities of interference being placed upon individual muslims to carry out and practice their religion daily is not limited to the United States alone.

Many of these countries, the United States included, and perhaps foremost, like to boast of their religious tolerance and freedoms, without noticing their own inclinations towards imposing upon Muslims demands that go against the very core of their religious duties.

To react like this out of a scare attitude after the 9-11 attacks is nothing more than illogical and childish reaction.
This message is dealing with a recent event in Singapore.


================================================== ===============The Policy on Hijab -
For or Against National Integration ?




Four Muslim girls and their families are being made to decide between their right to practise their religion and their right to have an education as the ultimatum to give up their hijab or be suspended from school crawls nearer.

And the reason for this unpleasant and potentially explosive situation is that banning the hijab is necessary because it would accentuate racial and religious differences which would undermine national integration. Maintaining the cohesiveness of our pluralistic society is imperative but because of its implications, to argue that the hijab poses this danger would require substantiative reasoning rather than merely strong emotive statements.

By arguing that the hijab hinders national integration and by hinging it on the premise that our racial and religious harmony will be threatened by its presence, the resulting insinuations about the Muslim community are dangerous to that harmony.

This is the irony.

The justification for banning the hijab is openly contradicted by the freedom given to the Sikh turban whose existence within our national schooling system bears no adverse consequences to the ability of the students to study within the same space, to learn and to excel academically and to play together and make friends which is the crux of the ban. This even though the turban accentuates racial and religious differences.

Introducing the hijab into this environment would not exactly be novel. Thus to allow the turban but to disallow the hijab is saying that one is acceptable and the other is not. Unless the charge made against the hijab can be proven to be valid, this policy should be forsook for the sake of our racial and religious harmony.

This ban on the hijab is conveying a dangerous message to both the Muslim and
non-Muslim that the beliefs, values and practices of the Muslim community contradict, nay violate, the interests of the nation. This does greater, nay genuine, harm to our racial and religious harmony where the Muslim and the non-Muslim are made to feel or believe that being Muslim is incompatible with being Singaporean.

This message will only impede or restrict our national integration; certainly it would dampen interest to interact. The manner in which this policy is being defended is leading to the demonisation of the Muslim community and the religion it professes and given current circumstances this would further stretched our social fabric.

It is obvious to many that the policy is lopsided and it is unthinkable that the proponents of this ban would continue to pursue it at the expense of our racial and religious harmony especially if for the sake of maintaining the unity of the school attire as if uniform colours and shapes matter more than the unity of our society.

Indeed to argue against the hijab supposedly for the sake of our national integration needs to be more convincing. Apart from the discrepancy which lies with the turban and the weakness of the allegation against the hijab, what is odd is that the hijab has been denied in the name of our racial and religious harmony but the local media channel has been allowed with apparent impunity to foster hatred and fear for Islam for many, many years by misrepresenting and vilifying it.

It is strange that certain quarters in our country, Muslim ones included, are attacking the hijab with concerted ferocity. Yet between wearing the hijab in national schools and the misrepresentation of Islam by the local media channel, it is impossible to deny that the genuine threat to our racial and religious harmony comes not from what is an innocent requirement of Islam but rather from what our newspapers and television screens are propagating as Islam.

The media shapes perceptions and perceptions shape the way people interact with one another. The hijab does not, and where it does, it is difficult to argue that the media does not have anything to do with it.

Comes tomorrow, either the Muslim girls are forced to expose their aurat or remained steadfast thus exposing themselves to the threat of suspension but either way our national interests would be less served. Ironic, this is.




Stop Media Terrorism Against Islam
&
Lets Preserve Our Racial and Religious Harmony



Faris Osman

[RCG]

Hi Lulua, me again.

While this event is supposedly happening in Singapore, why do you feel the need to lump the United States into the same mold?

Singapore has an entirely different set of laws. I have visited there myself. Have you?
I cannot speak for or against what they are doing as far as religious tolerance and freedom goes. Suffice it to say that banning the hijab is wrong in my eyes and does demonstrate a lack of tolerance for the harmless values of others.

But what I find annoying is that you preceded that article with a comment about America boasting of tolerance and freedom then followed up with an article that has nothing to do with the U.S.
So in effect it has the appearance that you are trying to attribute the same intolerance to my country whose laws protect freedom of expression. Whatever that expression may be.

If that is so then you are mistaken.

If this event were to have occured in the U.S. the families affected would be able to challenge the school district in court.
(just like the Muslim woman at the airport is now doing) And in all likelyhood the school district would lose that battle.

[Lulua]

Hi, RCG...me again.

Well, good that you have been able to notice that the article WAS about Singapore. And my reference in my introductory note that was a reference to the US as well as other democracies boasting of their many 'freedoms' was just that...a reference and nothing more.

And, yes...the US is guilty of imposing restrictions and assumptions on muslims, arab-appearing persons, or those assumed to be either, since the event of 9-11. This is something that is quite evident by the many many incidents that have happened nationwide(in the US). Now...this is not merely my own accusation, it is documented by the many cases being brought forth publicly to the various muslim agencies for notification and action, as well as the many other cases making it in the various venues of the news around the world, not to mention the countless others that have not reached such public notification, merely because of the fear that the individuals have had for not coming forward with their complaints.

I will not disagree with you that the US has a law proposing 'religious freedoms', and that is fine. If only that law was surely law of the land, in the true manner that it was truly implicated in all instances. If it was, then there would not have been nor continue to be the vast and panoramic screening of individuals merely because of their preference to wear hijab or to keep a long beard or wear the typical Pakistani/Afghani 'sirwal' suit (long baggy pants/long tunic over them). Nor would there have been and continue to be the long detaining of people for 'questioning' and investigation for months on end without legal consultation nor valid declaration of assumed crime, only to be released many months later, having either outstayed their visa permits, losing their jobs or much money, as well as having lost out on precious time at schools. Need eye-witness accounts for all these? Can provide...with names, locations, etc.

The US has some great assumed laws and ideals...if only they were truly implicated and put into full use, without the bigotry, without the leniency for one group of people, and exclusion of others. What is occuring nowadays against muslims, Islam in general, and arabs as well (whether muslim or non-muslim...but merely the relation of arab) is no better than what occured to even those faithful Japanese residents and citizens during WWII when all were gathered in far-reaching concentration camps. Dark page in history? Well...perhaps it is a bit of time that Americans wake up and look at what's happening now. If you don't want so much rhetoric going about on what is HAPPENING...and not what is SUPPOSED, then perhaps there is something that needs to be done.

Lulua.

[Tita]

"I will not disagree with you that the US has a law proposing 'religious freedoms', and that is fine. If only that law was surely law of the land, in the true manner that it was truly implicated in all instances. If it was, then there would not have been nor continue to be the vast and panoramic screening of individuals merely because of their preference to wear hijab or to keep a long beard or wear the typical Pakistani/Afghani 'sirwal' suit (long baggy pants/long tunic over them). Nor would there have been and continue to be the long detaining of people for 'questioning' and investigation for months on end without legal consultation nor valid declaration of assumed crime, only to be released many months later, having either outstayed their visa permits, losing their jobs or much money, as well as having lost out on precious time at schools. Need eye-witness accounts for all these? Can provide...with names, locations, etc.

I would like to read more about these things.

Peace to you,
Tita

[RCG]

>Hi, RCG...me again.
>
>Well, good that you have been
>able to notice that the
>article WAS about Singapore. And
>my reference in my introductory
>note that was a reference
>to the US as well
>as other democracies boasting of
>their many 'freedoms' was just
>that...a reference and nothing more.
>

Then why include the reference if you really expect me to believe it had nothing to do with the Singapore story?

>And, yes...the US is guilty of
>imposing restrictions and assumptions on
>muslims, arab-appearing persons, or those
>assumed to be either, since
>the event of 9-11. This
>is something that is quite
>evident by the many many
>incidents that have happened nationwide(in
>the US). Now...this is not
>merely my own accusation, it
>is documented by the many
>cases being brought forth publicly
>to the various muslim agencies
>for notification and action, as
>well as the many other
>cases making it in the
>various venues of the news
>around the world, not to
>mention the countless others that
>have not reached such public
>notification, merely because of the
>fear that the individuals have
>had for not coming forward
>with their complaints.
>

I would like to see some evidence of this. I dont believe it is as extreme as you are portraying it. What I see with my own eyes lately does not agree with all the paranoia. In particular I still see women wearing the hijab in public. They go about their business without showing signs of fear. And my Iranian friend still goes to work like before Sept 11. He isnt even an American citizen despite living here since the late 1970's.

>I will not disagree with you
>that the US has a
>law proposing 'religious freedoms', and
>that is fine. If only
>that law was surely law
>of the land, in the
>true manner that it was
>truly implicated in all instances.
>If it was, then there
>would not have been nor
>continue to be the vast
>and panoramic screening of individuals
>merely because of their preference
>to wear hijab or to
>keep a long beard or
>wear the typical Pakistani/Afghani 'sirwal'
>suit (long baggy pants/long tunic
>over them). Nor would there
>have been and continue to
>be the long detaining of
>people for 'questioning' and investigation
>for months on end without
>legal consultation nor valid declaration
>of assumed crime, only to
>be released many months later,
>having either outstayed their visa
>permits, losing their jobs or
>much money, as well as
>having lost out on precious
>time at schools. Need eye-witness
>accounts for all these? Can
>provide...with names, locations, etc.
>

You want me to believe that if the situation were reversed any other government would handle it differently? Lets say that thousands of Americans were living in a foreign country, like Egypt for example. And a few of those immigrants committed a serious crime, like the murder of 3000 Egyptians. Am I expected to believe that the Egyptian government would not round up some of those immigrants for questioning?

So 19 men of middle eastern descent hijack 4 aircraft and murder 3000 innocents. Meanwhile there are thousands within our borders that have violated their tourist visas. Now you question the right of our government to enforce the laws regarding these immigration violations? Would I be able to violate the laws in your country and go free?

>The US has some great assumed
>laws and ideals...if only they
>were truly implicated and put
>into full use, without the
>bigotry, without the leniency for
>one group of people, and
>exclusion of others. What is
>occuring nowadays against muslims, Islam
>in general, and arabs as
>well (whether muslim or non-muslim...but
>merely the relation of arab)
>is no better than what
>occured to even those faithful
>Japanese residents and citizens during
>WWII when all were gathered
>in far-reaching concentration camps. Dark
>page in history? Well...perhaps it
>is a bit of time
>that Americans wake up and
>look at what's happening now.
>If you don't want so
>much rhetoric going about on
>what is HAPPENING...and not what
>is SUPPOSED, then perhaps there
>is something that needs to
>be done.
>
>Lulua.

The laws of this land have not been cast aside since Sept 11. The First amendment provides for freedom of expression. The government is bound to not making any law respecting religion.
The laws covering the crimes of murder, vandalism, etc etc, have no exceptions regarding race religion. Just ask the man now in jail awaiting trial for the murder of the Sikh man he killed.

Our president, right after Sept 11, urged the people to not retaliate against Muslims saying that Islam is a religion of peace and Muslims were peaceful people and that the actions of a few extremists do not represent the whole. Those are not the words of a leader who wants to punish a group of people based on their religion or race.

But if you wish to compare today's events with the Japanese internment during WW2, let us also discuss how a Muslim country handled a similar situation in the past. In 1915 when Turkey lost a few battles with the Imperial Russian army they blamed the Christian Armenian minority for allegedly helping the Russians. And subsecuently massacred 1,500,000 Armenians. Those they didnt murder were either forcibly converted to Islam or were deported to the Syrian Desert and left to die.

Need eyewitness accounts for this? Can provide.... with names, locations, pictures etc. I dont see your supposed moral high ground by any means.

In 1989, the US government made restitution to the Japanese who were wrongly interred.

What restitution by Muslims, if any, has been made to the surviving Armenians?

[Muslihah]

As-Salamu-Alaikum Wr Wb

America does play a great role influencing the mind of people, especially through her media.Americans should be more alert about this matter.Whenever the word Islam is said, the first thing that comes in thought of most people is either terror or violence.In fact the non-muslims in Singapore began to feel doubtful when the Muslims started to wear as what Islam has taught around 20-30 years ago.

I am from Singapore, and I follow up this issue from the beginning.Three girls were already suspended from their schools.Apart from the media terrorism against Islam, I think the Muslim society do contribute much too.Perhaps the sikh are allowed to wear their turbans to schools, offices and even in the army due to the number of them wearing it.How can we stress the wearing of hijab when the outfits of the Muslims are more like the westeners? How can we stress the wearing of hijab when most Muslims are taking knowledge more than covering the aurah?

So I want to say out here to all the Muslims to know your religion thoroughly, in order to maintain the Islamic teachings.

[Lulua]

Tita...will get some of those news reports and their corresponding references for you. Will take me some time, going thru my files, and kind of busy these days. But please do be patient, the evidence will be comging thru for you to read for yourself, inshaAllah.

For RCG...well, no 'high moral ground' here, as you like to refer to it...merely speaking from the voice of knowledge and realization of the truth of current events happening in the world. You see, many things are not making it to the western media, and even those few stories that do make it are concealed in back sections and back pages, with very little space dedicated to viewing it, so that the average reader does not even recognize such news stories. Again...no 'high moral ground'. Just trying to enrich you and others with the knowledge and realization that such things are happening.

As for the offenses of the passport violations and other things concerning the detention of muslims in the US...can you explain...how is it that many of those violations are violations that were long overdue? I mean...those violations were violations which had been ongoing for some time. How is it that the passport offices only noticed those violations after the 9-11 attacks? And...is it only muslims and arab violaters that are guilty of such violations? You mean to claim that absolutely no Indians or Koreans or Chinese or ppl from other various origins around the globe have not concurred similar violations? And...for such minor violations...is it common practice to keep the detainees in detention for non-determined limits without proper access to legal council? And without access to family? Will relate to you, inshaAllah, some personal revelations by some who have since been released.

oh...and don't get me wrong. I'm with you...a violation is a violation...and all violaters should be dealt with accordingly. Seems to be that the forces governing such departments should do a little more work in tracking down such violaters earlier on in their violation..to hopefully ward off possible trouble-makers in the process and to 'weed out' the undesirables from their immediate proximity. Shape up or ship out, as they say.

Lulua.

[RCG]

Hi Lulua,

Overstaying ones visa is not considered a serious crime. And like you pointed out, surely there are also visa violations by other people than Middle Easterners. There is the additional problem of illegals crossing over from Mexico. They dont need a visa to cross the border.

No doubt the INS has a tremendous case load of people who overstay their visa permits. And they probably dont have the manpower or resources to chase down everyone on the day their visa expires.

The events of Sept 11 created a whole new kind of urgency. Who knew if there were more hijackers, suicide bombers, or others waiting to strike? Since the hijackers were all of Middle Eastern descent it was better to be safe than sorry. So those from the ME who overstayed their visas suddenly found themselves at the top of the priority list and were rounded up for questioning.
I realize that most of those detained were not involved with Sept 11. What other way was there to find out than rounding them up and interrogating them?

[Lulua]

RCG...believe it or not...I can sympathize with that mentality and approach to the problem which was at hand, and in fact, still is. As well, it is a typical and predictable human trait...to immediately perhaps overact a little if not much, and take out the anger and fear on more than those who individually deserve such punishment.

But...on the other hand...please do try to understand the argument that I am raising here...to gather up for detainment and questioning such large numbers of innocents? for months on end? And in so many of the cases...documented now...without any access to legal consultation, no contact with families and loved ones...and even without any definite charge brought up against them for a legal grounds for the detention? This, my friend...is the cause now for many suits to eventually be raised against those who violated basic rights, as well as causing much friction in across-the-board relations between the countries concerned.

Will be posting soon, inshaAllah, some documented cases for you to read about. Please be patient with me...busy right now with family and things...but will be posting these soon for you and others to read about. Documentation to prove to you what I am talking about.

Lulua.

[RCG]

>RCG...believe it or not...I can sympathize
>with that mentality and approach
>to the problem which was
>at hand, and in fact,
>still is. As well, it
>is a typical and predictable
>human trait...to immediately perhaps overact
>a little if not much,
>and take out the anger
>and fear on more than
>those who individually deserve such
>punishment.
>
>But...on the other hand...please do try
>to understand the argument that
>I am raising here...to gather
>up for detainment and questioning
>such large numbers of innocents?
>for months on end?

I do understand the argument. But the threat of more attacks created an unparralleled urgency that we have not seen since the 1941 Pearl Harbor attack. And with this in mind normal methods of determining who was innocent and who was plotting other attacks were tossed out the window. To suddenly launch investigations, background checks and surveilance on thousands of illegal residents was impossible due to lack of manpower, lack of intel and lack of resources. And when you think about the sheer numbers of people and resources required to start such an investigation it becomes mind boggling. Further, IF there had been another attack, conventional investigation methods would have been too little, too late.
It was preferable and easier to detain all who could be located and start asking questions rather than allowing them to roam free and not knowing they might have possible connections to 9-11 or might have been planning other evil deeds.

Can you imagine the public backlash if another similar attack had happened right after the spectacle of 9-11 and the government was seen as doing nothing more than sitting on their hands?

When the government began announcing the numbers of people detained it had the appearance that something was being done. To the masses the appearance of doing something was better than doing nothing.
Even if the detentions fail to turn up many convictions, it is still better to be safe than sorry.

And
>in so many of the
>cases...documented now...without any access to
>legal consultation, no contact with
>families and loved ones...and even
>without any definite charge brought
>up against them for a
>legal grounds for the detention?
>This, my friend...is the cause
>now for many suits to
>eventually be raised against those
>who violated basic rights, as
>well as causing much friction
>in across-the-board relations between the
>countries concerned.
>
>Will be posting soon, inshaAllah, some
>documented cases for you to
>read about. Please be patient
>with me...busy right now with
>family and things...but will be
>posting these soon for you
>and others to read about.
>Documentation to prove to you
>what I am talking about.
>
>
>Lulua.


I dont have any doubt you have these cases. I would like to read them. Those who had American citizenship and were detained have the right to file suit if they feel their rights were abused. The others who overstayed their tourist visas should be tossed out with no chance to return.

[Nzingha]

>
>When the government began announcing the
>numbers of people detained it
>had the appearance that something
>was being done. To the
>masses the appearance of doing
>something was better than doing
>nothing.
>Even if the detentions fail to
>turn up many convictions, it
>is still better to be
>safe than sorry.
>


Actually I disagree with this. What your saying is that it is ok to violate the rights of one set of people because those of the same ethnicity caused a major upheval in america. throw out the laws and do whatever can be done to make the american public "think" or see an "appearance" that something is being done. This false security is wrong to begin but to violate the laws of the land of america to ensure this false sense of security is a whole other matter.

Your talking about picking out one set of peoples over another, something that america claims to be against. if another country did the same thing it would be called what? surely not right or understandable. Americans would be outraged to say the least if here in saudi all american and british citizens were rounded up, interrogated and held for a long period of time because some british and americans blow things up in riyahd (over liquir I might add) This of course would be seen as something terrible and contrary to human rights. But we are to excuse america for the same actions?

>
>I dont have any doubt you
>have these cases. I would
>like to read them. Those
>who had American citizenship and
>were detained have the right
>to file suit if they
>feel their rights were abused. >>

Their lives are already ruined what will a law suit bring except more excuses of why it had to be done to make the american public feel secure. Tell me does this american public include the many ME americans? do they not have the right to feel secure as well?

>The others who overstayed their
>tourist visas should be tossed
>out with no chance to
>return.

I disagree, it happens all the time in many countries even by americans visiting other lands. The problem I see w/ many ME peoples is that they genearlly don't handle any visa paper work in their own countries. It is usually handled by an agent so more should be done to educate such peoples on how to properly handle their paperwork. To stress they have until a certain date to stay, or can go about another process to extend their visit and how to renew their schooling visas. Which makes up the majority of the problems, rather than visit visas.


- Never do I argue with a man with a desire to hear him say what is wrong, or to expose him and win victory over him. Whenever I face an opponent in debate I silently pray - O Lord, help him so that truth may flow from his heart and on his tongue, and so that if truth is on my side, he may follow me; and if truth be on his side, I may follow him.
al-Imam Al-Shafi'i

[RCG]

>Actually I disagree with this. What
>your saying is that it
>is ok to violate the
>rights of one set of
>people because those of the
>same ethnicity caused a major
>upheval in america.


Wrong! "I" did not say that it was OK. I am saying that is what has been done. You are trying to read too much into this. And the government does have the right to round up people who violate the law regarding tourist visas. In other words do not get a tourist visa and expect to come on over, find a job and take up residence. Too bad for those who chose to ignore this simple rule.
The INS does deport people of other ethnic backgrounds when they are caught. ME people were bumped up to top priority after 9-11.


This false
>security is wrong to begin
>but to violate the laws
>of the land of america
>to ensure this false sense
>of security is a whole
>other matter.
>
>Your talking about picking out one
>set of peoples over another,
>something that america claims to
>be against. if another country
>did the same thing it
>would be called what? surely
>not right or understandable. Americans
>would be outraged to say
>the least if here in
>saudi all american and british
>citizens were rounded up, interrogated
>and held for a long
>period of time because some
>british and americans blow things
>up in riyahd (over liquir
>I might add) This of
>course would be seen as
>something terrible and contrary to
>human rights.

I would not be surprised if they did round up all Americans, Brits or whoever to find suspects. And in the interest of public safety it would be justifiable.


>>
>>I dont have any doubt you
>>have these cases. I would
>>like to read them. Those
>>who had American citizenship and
>>were detained have the right
>>to file suit if they
>>feel their rights were abused. >>
>
>Their lives are already ruined what
>will a law suit bring
>except more excuses of why
>it had to be done
>to make the american public
>feel secure.

What will a lawsuit bring? Get real!
Randy Weavers life was ruined when a government sniper shot his wife while holding an infant in 1992. This all started when Weaver did not show up in court to answer charges for firearms violations. The resulting lawsuit did not bring her, or his 14 yr old son who was also killed, back to life.
The government should not be allowed to get away with this kind of behavior.
And the only way to change that behavior is through the courts.


>>The others who overstayed their
>>tourist visas should be tossed
>>out with no chance to
>>return.
>
>I disagree, it happens all the
>time in many countries even
>by americans visiting other lands.
>The problem I see w/
>many ME peoples is that
>they genearlly don't handle any
>visa paper work in their
>own countries. It is usually
>handled by an agent so
>more should be done to
>educate such peoples on how
>to properly handle their paperwork.
>To stress they have until
>a certain date to stay,
>or can go about another
>process to extend their visit
>and how to renew their
>schooling visas. Which makes up
>the majority of the problems,
>rather than visit visas.
>

So let me see if I got this straight. You are saying that it is the US embassy's fault that the people they issue visas to dont follow the rules because they dont understand? The "I didnt know" defense is no excuse. Neither is the "pass the buck" game.
It is the individuals' responsibility to find out what is legal and what is not before entering.
Why dont you try to enter Singapore with a pack of chewing gum in your pocket and say "I didnt know this was illegal here". Or you could say "the issuing authority did not tell me about that". You really think they will make an exception for you?
Just ask that American kid, who was punished for vandalism there, if they enforce the laws or do they make exceptions so as not to hurt anyone's sensibilities.